And he is correct. The law is whatever the judges say it is. That's why The National Lampoon could exist in 1973 but not in 2019. Same Constitutional right to free expression, different laws.

The laws aren't different. What's changed is the culture. It isn't the law that would shut down the NatLamp in today's America. It would be shut down by boycotts and the withdrawal of advertising support. That's fascism of the cultural variety - some perspectives just aren't tolerated in today's America. But the culprit isn't the law, or the Constitution's protection of free expression.

Nope. The Heller decisions does not secure the God-given right. The 2nd Amendment does, and a leftist SCOTUS will scuttle any attempts to codify with relative ease on the way to a total ban on civilian ownership of firearms.

That's it for me...I refuse to engage your circle-talk. I'm just watching this thread to make sure it doesn't get hijacked again.

Codification would effectively protect the right. And as to the 2A alone securing the God-given right - believe that myth at your peril.

Distrust of the government. Everything is hunky-dory now in the modern, a gogo world don'tchaknow?

That is how stupid leftists think we unsophisticates are.

No, I really DO want to know what it is that he thinks 'no longer exists'.

Venezuela, within our lifetimes, was the largest economy and standing military on the Southern continent - EASILY the biggest Hispanic economy, and a big hitter - bigger than dang near anybody. And that republic went to sh*t in around a decade, and now they are eating rats... And without arms, they can do nothing - *NOTHING*- To evict the tyranny that has destroyed them.

Or is it the need for self defense? Because most of this country is not city or urban. Even in the city, 12 minutes is an admirable response time - But twelve minutes might as well be an hour in a desperate situation. Cops usually arrive after the fact, with body bags. Now put yourself 20 minutes out of town. There, it IS an hour response time. If you don't defend yourself, there is no defense at all... There is no place at all where you can rely on LEOs to save you. The only difference is that country folks are aware of that fact.

Even the matter of using arms for subsistence - Hunting is not a sport around here - It is necessary to life. Most of my meat has never seen a plastic tube or a styrofoam tray. If I were unable to hunt and unable to rely on others that do, I would be eating way worse than I am now. Right now, there is about 30 lbs of burger, maybe 10 lbs of bacon and sausage, and another 10 or so pounds of chicken in my freezer. The rest, way over 200 lbs, maybe over 400 lbs of meat came from hunting, fishing, and locally butchered beef and buffalo.

Living without firearms is not even possible. The idea is ludicrous simply from the position of subsistence and protection from varmints.

I don't see a damn thing one that has changed wrt weaponry and the R2KBA.

Codification would effectively protect the right. And as to the 2A alone securing the God-given right - believe that myth at your peril.

All you are doing is proving that the 2A as originally envisioned is no myth. It's authors knew the monarch's/statist's/authoritarian's singularly largest threat is a free and sovereign people, and work to continually erode the most prominent tangible symbol of that sovereignty that an individual can possess.

There is no other reason for them to be so fixated on constraining the right of law abiding people to own firearms.

You seem fine with their efforts.

You and I are heir to these God given rights. Its too damn bad you and so many others are willing to hand them over so quickly. None of us will like where this attitude leads us.

That's a stupid thing to say. The principle has already been established by Heller. Now the task is to work within the framework provided by the Constitution to codify that result so it can't be taken away by a future Court.

Quote

And as to the 2A alone securing the God-given right - believe that myth at your peril.

ha ha ha

Not as stupid as what is coming through the leftist agenda. They not only promote murder. They are enacting laws to make it legal.

The shit IS going to hit the fan in this country. It is inevitable. I have a cop friend that says when it happens, the badge is coming off.

All you are doing is proving that the 2A as originally envisioned is no myth. It's authors knew the monarch's/statist's/authoritarian's singularly largest threat is a free and sovereign people, and work to continually erode the most prominent tangible symbol of that sovereignty that an individual can possess.

There is no other reason for them to be so fixated on constraining the right of law abiding people to own firearms.

You seem fine with their efforts.

You and I are heir to these God given rights. Its too damn bad you and so many others are willing to hand them over so quickly. None of us will like where this attitude leads us.

You must be living on a different planet. Calls for gun control are not coming from those concerned with insurrection against the government, they are coming from folks concerned with doing something about some of the highest rates of gun violence - citizens killing citizens - in the Western world.

They don't want to restrict the citizens' militia, they want to restrict your ability to own a gun, or certain types of disfavored guns, if you choose. Heller is the Constitutional bulwark against these efforts, not the 2A. Heller's protection of your gun right is exceedingly vulnerable - same as the protection of a woman's right to choose that some conservatives have no problem whatsoever in taking away.

I am not "fine with their efforts". To the contrary, I am advocating the only practical means - codification of the individual RKBA - to prevent a future SCOTUS majority from overturning Heller and taking your guns away.

You must be living on a different planet. Calls for gun control are not coming from those concerned with insurrection against the government, they are coming from folks concerned with doing something about some of the highest rates of gun violence - citizens killing citizens - in the Western world.

They don't want to restrict the citizens' militia, they want to restrict your ability to own a gun, or certain types of disfavored guns, if you choose. Heller is the Constitutional bulwark against these efforts, not the 2A. Heller's protection of your gun right is exceedingly vulnerable - same as the protection of a woman's right to choose that some conservatives have no problem whatsoever in taking away.

I am not "fine with their efforts". To the contrary, I am advocating the only practical means - codification of the individual RKBA - to prevent a future SCOTUS majority from overturning Heller and taking your guns away.

Then your opinion is the Constitution is meaningless and we have no basis for discussion.

The 2A was very clearly codified but you're saying that particular codification is defective.

And therein lies the heart of the lawyer/liberal mindset: One needs the Judicial branch to interpret all portions of the Constitution, an act that the Judicial branch has no power codified in the Constitution itself to actually perform.

That act has the effect of making unelected judges rule this country by their whims, with the only way to control them is for their removal by Congress, something that only very rarely in our history has occurred.

We as free people do not need some unelected judge to interpret our rules we live by, particularly the unalienable rights we enjoy.

Logged

Yearning to stay free takes place in many ways at many different times, whether by withstanding planes or bayonets

And therein lies the heart of the lawyer/liberal mindset: One needs the Judicial branch to interpret all portions of the Constitution, an act that the Judicial branch has no power codified in the Constitution itself to actually perform.

That act has the effect of making unelected judges rule this country by their whims, with the only way to control them is for their removal by Congress, something that only very rarely in our history has occurred.

We as free people do not need some unelected judge to interpret our rules we live by, particularly the unalienable rights we enjoy.

The God-given right to self-defense is secured by the Heller Court's construction of the 2A. The 2A's predicate clause permits an alternate construction that would limit the Constitution's protection to the militia context, whatever the heck that means nowadays. That alternate construction may be just an election or two away. It is to prevent that from happening that I advocate codification of the individual right.

Look at your ridiculous argument.

You on one hand call it 'God-given right' then say it is there because of a few judges' whims.

You are spinning ferociously on your legalise lack of logic.

God gave us a right, and that's the end of it.

Logged

Yearning to stay free takes place in many ways at many different times, whether by withstanding planes or bayonets

No that's not the end of it. God can't protect and secure your rights. That's the purpose of the Constitution, as amended by the Bill of Rights. Problem is, the 2A's plain language limited its application to the citizen militia, not the "God given" right of individual self-defense. It took the Heller opinion to confirm that the Constitution secures and protects that individual right. Yes, it took the decision of a majority of unelected judges. And a different future majority can take it away. So that's why I advocate codifying the individual right. Go ahead and reject my advice - but don't blame me when a future court decides the 2A has nothing to do with your guns.

All you are doing is proving that the 2A as originally envisioned is no myth. It's authors knew the monarch's/statist's/authoritarian's singularly largest threat is a free and sovereign people, and work to continually erode the most prominent tangible symbol of that sovereignty that an individual can possess.

There is no other reason for them to be so fixated on constraining the right of law abiding people to own firearms.

You seem fine with their efforts.

You and I are heir to these God given rights. Its too damn bad you and so many others are willing to hand them over so quickly. None of us will like where this attitude leads us.

No that's not the end of it. God can't protect and secure your rights. That's the purpose of the Constitution, as amended by the Bill of Rights. Problem is, the 2A's plain language limited its application to the citizen militia, not the "God given" right of individual self-defense. It took the Heller opinion to confirm that the Constitution secures and protects that individual right. Yes, it took the decision of a majority of unelected judges. And a different future majority can take it away. So that's why I advocate codifying the individual right. Go ahead and reject my advice - but don't blame me when a future court decides the 2A has nothing to do with your guns.

..SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! Do I need to post the 2nd...word for word? NO INFRINGING.. unconstitutional to do anything else. BTW The constitution and BILL OF RIGHTS came from Bible principle's. We are a Christian nation. Founded by Christians. I have to prove that out too? You don't have to believe in God, but your rights came from God. You are totally wrong. It is about taking away gun rights. People will die with or without guns. That is the PLOY they want to use to take away gun rights. You youngsters buy into the B.S. Same as Obamcare was NOT ABOUT HEALTH..but the ploy was to sell it under "health" Lenin controlled people for 70 years with his "health plan". Obamcare was communism, a plan to put in job killing regulations and invoke 19 new taxes on we the people. Yet, some still think it was about 'health". Hitler had the same Obamcare plan. Mandated, no choice. This bill about guns will not stop, ANY DEATHS. FOOLISH THINKING. It esp. will NOT stop any citizens death. Every communist country that took guns away from the people, died at Communist hands. MILLIONS. 58 MILLION UNDER MAO. You need some history lessons. Was this truth "not kind"? FACTS. Time for a well regulated m!litia. ---------------------------

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

..SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! Do I need to post the 2nd...word for word? NO INFRINGING.. unconstitutional to do anything else. BTW The constitution and BILL OF RIGHTS came from Bible principle's. We are a Christian nation. Founded by Christians. I have to prove that out too? You don't have to believe in God, but your rights came from God. You are totally wrong. It is about taking away gun rights. People will die with or without guns. That is the PLOY they want to use to take away gun rights. You youngsters buy into the B.S. Same as Obamcare was NOT ABOUT HEALTH..but the ploy was to sell it under "health" Lenin controlled people for 70 years with his "health plan". Obamcare was communism, a plan to put in job killing regulations and invoke 19 new taxes on we the people. Yet, some still think it was about 'health". Hitler had the same Obamcare plan. Mandated, no choice. This bill about guns will not stop, ANY DEATHS. FOOLISH THINKING. It esp. will NOT stop any citizens death. Every communist country that took guns away from the people, died at Communist hands. MILLIONS. 58 MILLION UNDER MAO. You need some history lessons. Was this truth "not kind"? FACTS. Time for a well regulated m!litia. ---------------------------

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Your argument is not with me, sir. Read the dissenting opinions in Heller, who view the 2A through the prism of the predicate clause. Your rights may come from God, but God can't protect them. Your precious gun right is hanging by the thread of a SCOTUS majority. The 2A is defective, and the individual right needs to be codified.

No that's not the end of it. God can't protect and secure your rights. That's the purpose of the Constitution, as amended by the Bill of Rights. Problem is, the 2A's plain language limited its application to the citizen militia, not the "God given" right of individual self-defense. It took the Heller opinion to confirm that the Constitution secures and protects that individual right. Yes, it took the decision of a majority of unelected judges. And a different future majority can take it away. So that's why I advocate codifying the individual right. Go ahead and reject my advice - but don't blame me when a future court decides the 2A has nothing to do with your guns.

Heller v DC protects the right to own a gun and that they are purposed for the 2A also overturning the ban on handguns.

Logged

"I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign nation of many sovereign states; a perfect union one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey it laws; to respect its flag; and to defend it against all enemies." -William Page

Your argument is not with me, sir. Read the dissenting opinions in Heller, who view the 2A through the prism of the predicate clause. Your rights may come from God, but God can't protect them. Your precious gun right is hanging by the thread of a SCOTUS majority. The 2A is defective, and the individual right needs to be codified.

Don't shoot me, pal, I'm just the messenger.

As long as we have RINO's and liberal gun grabbers, the 2A will always hang by a thread. Keep strongly in mind, that the 2A is the right upon which all of our other rights are dependent. Think about it.

Logged

"I believe in the United States of America as a Government of the people, by the people, for the people; whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a republic; a sovereign nation of many sovereign states; a perfect union one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey it laws; to respect its flag; and to defend it against all enemies." -William Page

As long as we have RINO's and liberal gun grabbers, the 2A will always hang by a thread. Keep strongly in mind, that the 2A is the right upon which all of our other rights are dependent. Think about it.

There's no way the 2nd Amendment will be repealed without a Civil War.

Not for at least another decade. Two at most.

Logged

"It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news. With a pillow. Until it stops moving." - Iowahawk

Whatever you're doing today, do it with all the confidence of a four-year-old wearing a Batman tee-shirt.

The God-given right to self-defense is secured by the Heller Court's construction of the 2A. The 2A's predicate clause permits an alternate construction that would limit the Constitution's protection to the militia context, whatever the heck that means nowadays. That alternate construction may be just an election or two away. It is to prevent that from happening that I advocate codification of the individual right.

If it is a God-Given Right, (unalienable), then the Court did not grant it, and nothing the court does can take that Right away. I explained at length the purpose and meaning of the RKBA, and continuing to spout the nonsense that the right exists so the government can form armies (to exert power) still does pass muster. Especially when, in the Federalist, the point was made that it was The People who retain the Right to protect their Liberty from Government force. The Amendment even says "The Right of The People...", a phrase which, in all other cases with the Constitution, reserves a Right specifically to The People, and none other.

The Court may fail to acknowledge that unalienable (God-Given) Right, as it has failed in the past to acknowledge the freedom from involuntary servitude of one group of people it failed to acknowledge as People, and failed to defend the innocent lives of another group it fails to recognize as People, but neither the Supreme Court, nor any court, can take the Right away.

It is unalienable, a natural and God-Given Right, it exists. Period.

The Supreme Court can only fail or succeed in their purpose to secure that Right (and others) from the illicit machinations and usurpation of Government, (from what has traditionally been defined as tyranny). They have been wrong before.

Now we're back to the raison d'etre for the 2nd Amendment--to secure the Rights of the People from Government when Government fails to secure their Rights.

There are no "Socialists", no "Progressives", only Communists, with every negative image that totalitarianism might muster, demanding fealty and conformity to their views, with a legacy of 150,000,000 dead and counting.

No that's not the end of it. God can't protect and secure your rights. That's the purpose of the Constitution, as amended by the Bill of Rights. Problem is, the 2A's plain language limited its application to the citizen militia, not the "God given" right of individual self-defense. It took the Heller opinion to confirm that the Constitution secures and protects that individual right. Yes, it took the decision of a majority of unelected judges. And a different future majority can take it away. So that's why I advocate codifying the individual right. Go ahead and reject my advice - but don't blame me when a future court decides the 2A has nothing to do with your guns.

No, the problem is that you are misreading the predicate clause. I gave you the background on that, from the Federalist, yet you persist. So let me give you a modern language version:

Because the Army needs to be kept, but kept under control in order to keep a free country free, everyone gets to own weapons, especially guns, and no one is supposed to limit that.

As for Heller, that decision only confirmed something which was understood to exist before Miller (an erroneous decision upholding a bad law on incorrect information and an incorrect understanding of the predicate clause): That The People had a Right to Keep and Bear Arms which was not to be infringed.

There are no "Socialists", no "Progressives", only Communists, with every negative image that totalitarianism might muster, demanding fealty and conformity to their views, with a legacy of 150,000,000 dead and counting.